\u00a0
Rail usage is up 14% year-on-year<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0
\nIndustry, politicians, and civil servants will doubtless be taking some quiet satisfaction from the upward trend in rail usage reported by the regulator, the Office of Rail and Road. <\/p>\n

In the latest quarter where we have figures, for July to September 2023, a total of 397 million rail passenger journeys were recorded in Great Britain. This is a 14% increase on the 350 million journeys in the same quarter in the previous year. There were 1,496 million journeys in the year to September 30, 2023 \u2013 a 21% increase on the 1,238 million journeys made in the previous 12-month period.<\/p>\n

And as Passenger Transport<\/em> reported last month, the latest ORR report shows fares income for 2022\/23 surging from \u00a36.4bn to \u00a38.6bn.<\/p>\n

Quiet satisfaction is perhaps too modest a reaction. For reasons I set out below, the increases are in fact surprisingly good and the conclusion I draw from the figures is that there is huge potential, not simply to recover to the pre-Covid position but to sail past that. Indeed, LNER for example has already achieved this. 4.2 million journeys in 2020\/21 became 23.4 million in 2022\/23, the highest figure ever and that is without adding in the numbers using the East Coast open access operators.<\/p>\n

Surprisingly good because the railway suffers from a number of brakes on progress that can only serve to deter passengers. If government and industry can only release these brakes, the potential for vibrant growth can be set free. So what are these brakes? I have identified five.<\/p>\n

Avanti, CrossCountry, and Northern cancelled more trains in 2023 than during the pandemic in 2020, despite running fewer services overall<\/p>\n

1. Industrial action<\/strong><\/p>\n

Industrial action, and the consequent cancellation of services, and disrupted and overcrowded journeys when trains do run. There were 29 days last year when industrial action took place, around one in every 12 days. While the RMT disputes seem to be close to resolution, there has been a hardening of attitude within ASLEF, and of course, while management can cover some RMT roles on strike days, when ASLEF withdraw their labour, no trains run.<\/p>\n

Sadly, I see no prospect of the ASLEF dispute being settled this side of a general election. It may be that the union believes it can hold out and get a better deal from an incoming Labour government. That is far from certain. <\/p>\n

The present government has in fact worsened industrial relations by forcing on to the statute book minimum service levels which they paint as a method to ensure an adequate timetable can operate on strike days, but is really intended to make strike action ineffective. <\/p>\n

Preventing a worker from withdrawing his or her labour is a pretty drastic step in a democracy, but leaving aside the ethics of this, it is doubtful if it will work. Can you really force someone at metaphorical gunpoint to turn up for work, and get them to work normally?<\/p>\n

The reality is that the railway, like many industries, operates on goodwill. That is in short supply at the moment. It was noticeable that some operators like Thameslink and Northern had to severely cut their New Year\u2019s Eve services as their employees simply decided they did not want to work overtime, and wanted the evening off instead. The fact that over the years many train operators have relied on overtime from their employees as a cheaper way of running services rather than training new staff makes the industry particularly vulnerable now.<\/p>\n

Avanti, CrossCountry, and Northern cancelled more trains in 2023 than during the pandemic in 2020, despite running fewer services overall. <\/p>\n

It is a disgrace that King\u2019s Cross, Euston and Paddington were all closed on Christmas Eve<\/p>\n

2. Engineering works<\/strong><\/p>\n

These have to be undertaken, of course, but when is the industry going to adjust to the new patterns of travel on the network which have seen leisure travel increase and commuter traffic decrease? It is commercially inept on many lines to still be undertaking works on Saturdays, Sundays, and holiday times.<\/p>\n

It is a disgrace that King\u2019s Cross, Euston and Paddington were all closed on Christmas Eve. The industry has a massive opportunity to attract passengers on such occasions, but instead shuts stations.<\/p>\n

Given that there is now a great deal of home working, it would in most cases make sense to carry out works on Mondays or Tuesdays, and in January and February rather than over the holiday period. I know that both Network Rail and GBRTT have been giving consideration to this issue for some time, but where are the results?<\/p>\n

Moreover, engineering works seem to be increasing in frequency and duration. On the Tube network in particular, there seems barely a weekend when some line or part of line is not closed, a situation that was not the case 10 years ago. Can we be convinced that the industry is using the best up-to-date equipment and best techniques to minimise the time taken for such works?<\/p>\n

Since a very unfortunate overrun of works one New Year about 10 years ago which badly affected services into Liverpool Street for some days after services were due to resume, the industry has been risk averse, building in extra time for possessions so not to overrun. But that means that there are many more hours when trains could run but do not. Would it not be better all round to accept that, say, 2 or 3% of possessions will overrun if this means shorter and fewer possessions overall, more trains and fewer rail replacement buses?<\/p>\n

The situation is also not helped by train operators running buses when the railway line is actually available. I have identified a number of occasions when Southern has run rail replacement buses from Brighton and Lewes to Three Bridges when the line was actually available from the roughly midway point of Haywards Heath either south or north of the station. Rail operators should understand their passengers want to be on trains, not buses, and alternative arrangements should operate for the convenience of passengers, not for rail planners. <\/p>\n

On New Year\u2019s Eve, a flood in a tunnel near Ebbsfleet meant no Eurostar services ran out of or into England, at huge inconvenience to thousands of people. Why could trains not have run to and from the mothballed Ashford from where the line into France was available? I accept that that would have been logistically challenging but did anyone even assess that, or was Eurostar\u2019s attitude one of c\u2019est la vie?<\/p>\n